Aftershocks from a tragedy

Jeanette MaplesIt was worse than we thought, this failure to protect the life of Jeanette Maples, the 15-year-old girl from Eugene who died last month of some awful combination of starvation and injuries. Lane County officials have charged her father and stepmother with aggravated murder.

It wasn't a case of supreme social indifference. It was, instead, a case in which several people in her life called to report their concerns that she was being abused. On at least four occasions, such callers spoke to somebody in the state's Department of Human Services about their fears. In at least two of those cases, an agency employee failed to follow established policies about abuse complaints. He, she or they were, it seems, a little too eager to clear the complaint and get off the phone.

This is what we've learned after 30 days of an agency investigation into the case. While further reports will clarify and elaborate on these findings, what the agency acknowledged Wednesday adds another layer of shock to an already shocking case.

It's still true that more people -- the neighbors and friends who have been punishing themselves for the last seven weeks -- could have done more to intervene to help Jeanette. But who knew that four complaints about suspected abuse of the same child wouldn't be enough to get the attention of the state? How many does it take?

The failures documented by Wednesday's initial report represent a tragedy of errors. Once, the agency failed to respond immediately to the complaint, as dictated by policy, although it did get around to it a few days later. And when a caseworker looked into the complaint, he or she apparently failed to ask enough people the right questions, despite the clues available in the family history and from the nature of the complaint. On at least two other occasions, the complaint was "closed at screening," which means the complaint never was referred to an investigator.

And on a particularly chilling note, the department apparently was too eager to conclude that Jeanette's age made her less vulnerable. Because she was old enough to speak for herself but didn't complain or perhaps confirm reports of abuse, the agency's screener or screeners concluded that "an assessment of the abuse reports was not warranted."

As well-meaning or overworked as agency employees are, there is no excuse for so quickly dismissing the complaints about Jeanette Maples. The Department of Human Services is, after all, the state agency that exists to protect Oregon's children from those who would do them harm. If any organization should have been equipped to follow the trail of complaints and suggestive evidence, it's this one.

One DHS employee has been placed on leave pending the completion of a personnel review that was launched as a result of the investigation. There may be more to follow, and that may not be the end of it. It's still not clear, the report says, whether one or two individuals failed Jeanette, or whether there was a broader failure of the protective system.

This painful scrutiny must continue until it becomes clear. A person who calls the state agency to plead on behalf of an injured or neglected child shouldn't have to wonder if anybody is paying attention.